Use of an intracardiac electrogram eliminates the need for a surface ECG during implantable cardioverter-defibrillator follow-up

被引:4
|
作者
Michael, Kevin A.
Peterson, Brett J.
Yue, Arthur M.
Wilson, Ryan D.
Wang, Li
Ousdigian, Kevin
Wilkoff, Bruce
Sterns, Laurence
Morgan, John M.
机构
[1] Southampton Gen Hosp, Wessex Cardiothorac Ctr, Southampton SO16 6YD, Hants, England
[2] Medtronic Inc, Minneapolis, MN USA
[3] Cleveland Clin Fdn, Cleveland, OH USA
[4] Royal Jubilee Hosp, Victoria, BC, Canada
来源
关键词
defibrillation-ICD; electrocardiogram; new technology; pacing;
D O I
10.1111/j.1540-8159.2007.00888.x
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background: A surface electrocardiogram (SECG) for pacing threshold measurements during routine implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) follow-up can be cumbersome. This study evaluated the use of an intrathoracic far-field electrogram (EGM) derived between the Can and superior vena cava (SVC) electrode-the Leadless electrocardiogram (LLECG), in dual chamber ICDs in performing pacing threshold tests. Methods: The LLECG was evaluated prospectively during atrial and ventricular pacing threshold testing as a substudy of the Comparison of Empiric to Physician-Tailored Programming of Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators trial (EMPIRIC) in which dual chamber ICDs were implanted in 888 patients. Threshold tests were conducted at 1 volt by decrementing the pulse width. Follow-up at three months compared pacing thresholds measured using LLECG with those using Lead I of the surface ECG (SECG). The timesaving afforded by LLECG was assessed by a questionnaire. Results: The median threshold difference between LLECG and SECG measurements for both atrial (0.00 ms, P = 0.90) and ventricular (0.00 ms, P = 0.34) threshold tests were not significant. Ninety percent of atrial and ventricular threshold differences were bounded by +/- 0.10 ms and -0.10 to +0.04 ms, respectively. We found that 99% of atrial and ventricular thresholds tests at six and 12 months attempted using LLECG were successfully completed. The questionnaire indicated that 65% of healthcare professionals found LLECG to afford at least some timesaving during device follow-ups. Conclusion: Routine follow-up can be performed reliably and expeditiously in dual chamber Medtronic (Minneapolis, MN, USA) ICDs using LLECG alone, resulting in overall timesaving.
引用
收藏
页码:1432 / 1437
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Clinical follow-up of patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillator
    da Fonseca, Silvia Martelo Souza
    Belo, Luiz Gustavo
    Carvalho, Hecio
    Araujo, Nilson
    Munhoz, Claudio
    Siqueira, Leonardo
    Maciel, Washington
    Andrea, Eduardo
    Atie, Jacob
    ARQUIVOS BRASILEIROS DE CARDIOLOGIA, 2007, 88 (01) : 8 - 16
  • [2] Individualization of follow-up in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator patients with the help of automatic remote implantable cardioverter-defibrillator monitoring
    Neuser, H
    Schumacher, B
    Kottkamp, H
    Schmidinger, H
    Schuchert, A
    Brugada, P
    EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL, 2004, 25 : 166 - 166
  • [3] FOLLOW-UP OF 51 PATIENTS WITH THE AUTOMATIC IMPLANTABLE CARDIOVERTER-DEFIBRILLATOR
    TROUP, PJ
    DUQUETTE, SE
    CHAPMAN, PD
    CLINICAL RESEARCH, 1986, 34 (04): : A903 - A903
  • [4] Appropriate and Inappropriate Electrical Therapies Delivered by an Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator: Effect on Intracardiac Electrogram
    Stempniewicz, Peter
    Cheng, Alan
    Connolly, Allison
    Wang, Xin Yuan
    Calkins, Hugh
    Tomaselli, Gordon F.
    Berger, Ronald D.
    Tereshchenko, Larisa G.
    JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY, 2011, 22 (05) : 554 - 560
  • [5] The Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Minimalist An Approach to Patient Follow-Up and Management of Implantable Defibrillators
    Sweeney, Michael O.
    CIRCULATION, 2012, 126 (03) : 369 - 377
  • [6] High failure rate for an epicardial implantable cardioverter-defibrillator lead: Implications for long-term follow-up of patients with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator
    Brady, PA
    Friedman, PA
    Trusty, JM
    Grice, S
    Hammill, SC
    Stanton, MS
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY, 1998, 31 (03) : 616 - 622
  • [7] Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator electrode fracture: Follow-up, troubleshooting, and evaluation
    Kella, Danesh K.
    Stambler, Bruce S.
    JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY, 2021, 32 (05) : 1452 - 1457
  • [8] Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator in Brugada syndrome: Long-term follow-up
    El-Battrawy, Ibrahim
    Roterberg, Gretje
    Liebe, Volker
    Ansari, Uzair
    Lang, Siegfried
    Zhou, Xiaobo
    Borggrefe, Martin
    Akin, Ibrahim
    CLINICAL CARDIOLOGY, 2019, 42 (10) : 958 - 965
  • [9] Implantable cardioverter/defibrillator (ICD) follow-up
    Gwechenberger, M.
    JOURNAL FUR KARDIOLOGIE, 2023, 30 (11-12): : 276 - 280
  • [10] Implantable cardioverter defibrillator clinic casualties: Inadvertent reprogramming during routine implantable cardioverter defibrillator follow-up
    Ozahowski, TP
    Greenberg, ML
    Mock, P
    Holzberger, PT
    Gerling, B
    Zalinger, C
    Perry, C
    PACE-PACING AND CLINICAL ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY, 1996, 19 (10): : 1524 - 1525